About your Search

20121112
20121120
STATION
MSNBCW 15
MSNBC 14
CNNW 4
CNN 3
CSPAN 3
KQED (PBS) 2
WETA 2
WMPT (PBS) 2
CNBC 1
KGO (ABC) 1
WJLA 1
WMAR (ABC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 56
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 56 (some duplicates have been removed)
better have one. (laughter) >> do like ronald reagan? do you like ronald reagan? >> of course i do. >> i'll make you ronald reagan by you, and i can go in anderson, south carolina and get a social security saying you're ronald reagan. if you're an employer and a hispanic person comes to you with a card that says i'm ronald reagan, you say you don't look like ronald reagan, you can get sued. so what i want to do is have documents that can be verified for employment. i think we should all turn our social security card into a biometric document that can't be faked and you go back to roger ailes to renew your contract, you need to pay mike more. >> say that one more time. >> roger ailes, mike huckabee knocks it out the park on saturday night. >> there you go, there you go. >> when you go back to negotiate with roger, you have a document thats can prove quickly that you're mike huckabee. if you did that one thing along with securing the border, it would be harder than heck to hire an illegal immigrant. and if they do, they should lose their business and go to jail. >> it sounds reasonable, th
on the primary. i want to touch on something david said. the year that things shifted, before ronald reagan, he 70% top tax rates for top income earners. you had really powerful unions. had you major government abuses of power. now republicans have continued to move right, as democrats have moved right. you point out romney care. that is the basis for the president's health care reform. in a lot of ways, conservative ideas have won the day. we're no longer talking about 70% tax rates, but republicans in response to draw a really stark contrast have moved out further to the right. to move back to the center there, are policy differences, but it requires subtlety and nuances. but it's harder than yelling about death panels and soci socialism. >> the primary voters have been delivering tea party candidates and overthrowing some incumbent senate candidates, ending up with tea party candidates that absolutely cannot win as we saw in indianapolis. so as much as there are leadership questions involved, how do you get control of the republican primary electorate? >> for a party to be defined as cohesiv
that welcomes and that celebrates legal immigrants. ronald reagan famously called legal immigrants americans by choice. and we need to celebrate that story of those who risk everything seeking freedom because that's what makes our country strong. >> don't we have to make policy changes, too? it isn't just for politics. i believe immigrants come here to work, not just for welfare. i happen to believe they smart small business. i think you mentioned that. they're good entrepreneurial people that help grow our economy. but we need to give them worker permits, bring them out of the shadows, give them a path to citizenship. leaders like yourself, an an american-cuban-hispanic. you've got to get out there and make this case, you and marco rube yoe a rubio, go back and make the case to the hispanic community. >> larry, i think we should remain and welcome and embrace legal immigrants. at the same time, we've got to continue to respect rule of law and not adopt policies that are unfair for the millions of people who have been waiting years and sometimes decades to come into this country legally. rul
should perhaps stop using the word "mandates." it wasn't terribly long ago that ronald reagan won 49 states. that's a mandate. it's unthinkable that any candidate can win anywhere close to that. obama won a pretty impressive victory even without a serious third party candidate, he did not get 51% of the popular vote. he won 26 states to romney's 24 states. we'll see time after time very, very close elections. we need to rethink the negotiations of mandates and say this person won the presidency. they need to go forward with that agenda. >> what about the republicans? are they going to do a big rethink here? >> yes, and more than one. it was interesting that the republican governors happened to be meeting this week in las vegas when this news about the interesting comments that romney made to his donors that we just saw and the republican governors, bobby jindal of louisiana did not miss five seconds before they really denounced what romney was saying. the republicans have a lot of things to think about, not of which is their growing problem with hispanic voters. that is the big growi
of value for what i pay. >> bill: they say we're doing this in the legacy of ronald reagan. bull you know what. ronald reagan raised taxes five times. >> reagan would have no place in the current republican party given some of the things they did. grover norquist holds him up as an icon. grover is in a completely different place than he is on taxes. >> bill: why don't the media expose these people as the liars and hypocrites that they are? >> because they're fair and balanced. >> bill: so are we going over the fiscal cliff? >> i think we are. i think we are. for a couple of reasons. one, there's not a whole lot of time. it is six weeks from tomorrow to the start -- >> bill: they don't have any backbone. >> that's number two. number three 80 lame ducks who may not show up to vote. plus you've got this stale -- continuing stalemate on tax and spending policies and then on top of everything else, it is not really a fiscal cliff. it is a fiscal slope. it stays in place. they called it a cliff but the damage to
conference after being re-elected to a second term as president, then president ronald reagan was asked if he had anything to say to the people in the country who did not vote for him and who did not feel that they were part of the reagan revolution. he was also asked about nancy reagan falling down and bumping her head right before the election. he said that she had a tender lump on the side of her head, but that she would be fine. in president clinton's first press conference, after he was re-elected to a second term, the president started to answer a question about the role of first lady hillary clinton in the second clinton term, before he sort of diverted himself into talking about just how damned tired he was. >> well, let me answer the question about hillary. i think what first lady will do is something that i think it will be consistent with what she's been doing, but we have not, frankly, we've been too tired to talk about it. yesterday, i'm embarrassed to tell the american people, i actually slept past noon. i was tired. >> there's no shame in that. >> in the first press conference
goal, like ronald reagan used to do, i want one headline, don't let the middle class be held hostage. he repeated it over and over again. >> reporter: he said it 19 times. >> he didn't want the headline to be switched by adversarial press or neutral press that didn't to want go with his line to say him, adamant, president adamant on rich paying 39.6%. maybe that's why you softened up to you. just an interpretation. >> reporter: i can tell you congressional republicans were happy with his response. they like to know there is some give. here's where the give could be, chris. nobody's talked about this. i mean, there's been some behind the scenes chatter on this, which is you could see tax rates temporarily go up just not all the way to 39%. it could be somewhere in the middle. ends up being the compromise for the one year. don't forget, this is all about setting the tax rates simply for 2013, while they negotiate larger tax reform. so, that could be what the wiggle room is. obviously, republicans have said they don't want to raise tax rates at all. they're fine with revenue. and the pr
should be granted a dozen to 14 years for raising my family. >> you talked about the diversity. >> ronald reagan said, i will not hold your youth and inexperience against you. >> i will pass that onto luke. >> you are talking about the diversity about the democratic caucus in which you lead in the house. it is a new thing at least that there is not a straight, white male majority in this caucus. and i wonder, you know, the republican party, won a larger majority of the white vote which they were bragging about today in terms of what went right for them in this election which they lost. they lost all minority groups by large margins. when you look at your group and you have that momentous change, what do you say to people who look at that change and think i'm not sure i'm happy about the fact that there is a -- in the democratic caucus? >> i haven't met anybody like that yet. >> but let's say i would say everybody is talking about how we can appeal to these people to vote for us and we are saying no, we want to go beyond that. we want them to represent us. so it is not about we need your v
won. you know, since ronald reagan we no longer have 70% tax rates on the highest income earners. nobody is arguing for that. we're arguing to go back to 39.6%. on health care reform, the president's health care reform was basically a conservative idea put into the national spotlight by democrats and passed by democrats. education reform. even cap and trade is really a republican approach to solving environmental problems. we no longer have anyone saying we don't need to balance the budget. in a lot of ways these conservative ideas have won the day. so republicans are in a place where they moved further and further to the right as the democratic party has amoved further and further to the right. now they're out in the mainstream, and in order to have a meaningful, stark contrast with democrats, they've gone to such a far right place that the american people just aren't comfortable with what they propose. >> i'm encouraged by some of the language i heard coming from some folks on the right. there's still people in conservative circles who are saying we can't compromise our values.
cracking around ronald reagan's feet, the first time he raised taxes. i remember when he said that. >> yes, exactly. well, i think the speaker, i think, is setting the tone, as you saw on the front page, above the fold in "the washington post," you know. call his caucus to task, saying he's got to get the nation's business done. and i think what he said implicitly and probably directly behind the door is, trust me on this. you know, i get it. i understand what we need to do. we're not going to sacrifice our principles and values, but we've got to get the nation's business done. and then when we have a bill kristol coming out and saying, you know, they're all rich guys who live out in hollywood. we can raise their taxes. what an 180-degree turn. >> they're not the small business men. >> you'll probably note this, what an election will do. winning and losing has a consequence. and i think for a lot of republicans right now, given where we were two years ago versus where we are right now, you realize, hey, we're going to have to deal. we're going to have to deal. >> what about the president?
was it, 1982 or 1983, back in the 1980's, tip o'neill and ronald reagan got together and made adjustments to social security that saved the program. that's my point. sometimes you need to adjust and change to save the very thing you care most about. and so tip o'neill didn't sell out the democratic party by embracing that agreement. the democrats in congress, many of them very progressive at that time who supported it, didn't work traders to the party. if we do it in a responsible way, a balanced and doesn't just gut the programs and just not all entitlement reform with no revenue, i think the base of the party and leaders and organized labor will understand. they also know the alternative is doing nothing, with bad damage to jobs and the economy. and ultimately insolvency of these programs themselves, or. b, the right wing of the republicans are coming in and taking over because we have done nothing to solve the problem and their answer to the solution would be much more draconian. host: jack. he's our first phone call for the senator. republican. go ahead. caller: mr. bayh, one question
or that ronald reagan was with the blowing up of the u.s. marines in beirut. >> this administration continues to put out things that are just not quite true. >> smear, character assassination, judgment before all the facts are in. >> we're getting that video in. house and senate committees will both hearings tomorrow as we reported a few minutes ago. former cia director david petraeus is expected to testify. you see some of the tone and tenor of what will perhaps happen behind closed doors tomorrow. i'm tamron hall. you can watch "news nation" every day 2:00 p.m. eastern time. "the cycle" is up next. into their work, their name on the door, and their heart into their community. small business saturday is a day to show our support. a day to shop at stores owned by our friends and neighbors. and do our part for the businesses that do so much for us. on november 24th, let's get out and shop small. challenge the need for such heavy measures with olay. regenerist micro-sculpting serum for firmer skin in 5 days. pretty heavy lifting for such a lightweight. [ female announcer ] olay regenerist. i ju
. >> reporter: he resigned in the wake of watergate. ronald reagan's second term -- >> a few months ago, i told the american people i did not trade arms for hostages. my heart and my best intentions still tell me that's true, but the facts and evidence tell me it is not. >> reporter: the iran contra affair. bill clinton -- >> i did not have sexual relations with that woman. >> reporter: impeached after the lewinsky mess. and george w. bush, well, there was the valerie plame spygate scandal, not to mentioning the handling of hurricane katrina. that's trouble for roughly 100% of re-elected presidents since 1972. yes, it's enough to give you second thoughts about that second term. so is there anything the obama team can do to prevent this? now, as bill clinton might say. >> it depends upon what the meaning of the word "is" is. >> reporter: the fact is, if there is going to be a second-term scandal, its seeds were probably sewn in the first term. the watergate break-in, nixon's first term. the actual iran contra deal, reagan's first term. bill clinton's liaison with lewinsky, first term. the actual
reasons, yes, because they expanded the earned income tax credit as ronald reagan did because they thought it was an effective anti-poverty program. >> congressman becerra, let me go to you on this. >> it's deja vu all over again. >> what are republicans doing to attract those certain members of the base? >> i don't think they read the tea leaves from november the 6th and i think they're still harkening to yesteryear. it's a new day in america and they should be catching up. he is the de facto leader of the party, mitt romney is still there, and so his comments remind folks of the 47% comment and it's unfortunate for them because they have to figure out a way to distance themselves from a guy who doesn't get it. >> i have to say he is not the de facto leader of the republican party. i think what this did was hasten romney's departure completely from the scene. romney has -- i mean i talked to republicans now. they talk about how you'll never see him speak at a convention again. people aren't going to be going to his door begging for his endorsement. that's a great question. >> de facto lea
-carrying member of the aarp. ronald reagan was 69 when he first ran for president. many worried he was too old for the job until his famous quip during a debate. >> i will not make age an issue of this campaign. i am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent's youth and inexperience. >> yes, reagan used age to his advantage. but seriously, how old is too old? remember senator strom thurman who commuted from walter reed to the capitol at the age of 100? his aides had to vote for him. of course, this argument isn't limited to the world of politics. ageism rages in the role world, too. how often have you heard those under 30 grumbling about those old guys sucking up all the jobs? so the talk back question of the day, should politicians have a mandatory retirement age? facebook.com/carolcnn. your responses later this hour. still the most dependable, longest-lasting full-size pickups on the road. and now we've also been recognized for lowest total cost of ownership -- based on important things, like depreciation, fuel, and maintenance costs. and now trade up to get a 2012 chevy silv
. there is that incentive as well. you have to look at ronald reagan as well as henry kissinger, when they went into negotiations, said you have to come willing to truly cut a deal. you may get 90%. >> takes both sides. obama is very good in liberal rhetoric blaming republicans. even in "l.a. times", obama wants to help the middle class but republicans don't want to give everything to the rich which is not true. and a lot of liberals are saying this was a mandate to raise taxes? i think people can be pro-choice, pro-day marriage and have fiscal responsibility and live within their means. jon: well, i mean to be honest, angela, the president campaigned on a platform saying i'm going to go back to the bill clinton tax rates and the wealthiest are going to have to pay more money and he won. >> but bill clinton worked with a republican congress and our economy was not in dire straits that it is right now. so if he really wants to go back to the bill clinton days he should go to the table and work with republicans. >> also you have to look taxes were historical high. one of the things they're talkin
is the payback from party leaders? guest: there is change and then there is change. tip o'neill and ronald reagan got together and saved the program. sometimes you need to adjust to change the thing you care most about. tip o'neill did not sell off the democratic party by embracing that. if we do it in a responsible way that doesn't gut the program, i think the base of the party will understand. the alternative is doing nothing with bad damage to the economy, or the right wing of the republicans coming in and taking over and their answer to the solution would be much more draconian. host: jack in kentucky. caller: i have one question. can you guarantee -- guest: i thought you're going to ask why indiana university and kentucky and not playing basketball this year. for the first time they are now playing and we are rivals. i cannot talk about classified information on tv. things like stinger missiles are very problematic and we do everything we can to keep track of them. muammar gaddafi stockpiles of weapons, surface- to-air missiles and we're doing everything to track those down and secure them.
in washington at the ronald reagan building. so i'm leaving. you'll wrap things up for us. >> i'll hold down the fort, but only while you're gone. >> you'll do an excellent job. we'll have much more of what's going on, including my interview with senator dianne feinstein. she's got a lot to say on this whole scandal. and it sounds to her like it's something out of the national enquirer. something very interesn common. they have teachers... ...with a deeper knowledge of their subjects. as a result, their students achieve at a higher level. let's develop more stars in education. let's invest in our teachers... ...so they can inspire our students. let's solve this. online outfit piccolo headphones buy now broadway show megapixels place to sleep little roadster war and peace deep sea diving ninja app hipster glasses 5% cash back sign up to get 5% everywhere online through december. only from discover. >>> the affair that brought down cia director david petraeus caught most officials in the nation's capital by surprise. and many of us by surprise. and they're finding general john allen's connecti
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 56 (some duplicates have been removed)